Courtney Love’s 8 Million Dollar Tweet

Imagine being sued for $8 million every time we gossiped.

It was recently reported that famed singer Courtney Love (widow of 90’s musician Kurt Cobain) is being sued for some offensive comments she made about her former fashion designer, Dawn Simorangkir, who owns the “Boudoir Queen” fashion line.

The lawsuit came on the heels of a similar one that ended in late January, which involved Love as a defendant in a two-week trial in a defamation case. She had been sued by her former lawyer, Rhonda Holmes, for a questionably offensive tweet that Love had posted on Twitter in 2010, which read that she “was… devastated when rhonda holmes esq of san diego was bought off.” By “bought off,” Love had implied that Holmes had taken a bribe. Although the disparaging Tweet was quickly deleted a few minutes after being posted, Holmes charged Love for libel to the tune of $8 million for the “Twibel” attack.

It was the first time that libel via Twitter was brought to trial under jury.

A quick recap: libel is defamation that is written or published; slander is defamation that is spoken. Defamation claims are nothing new (especially among celebrities), but this case was newsworthy because it was the first time that libel via Twitter was brought to trial under jury. Love was ultimately acquitted of the defamation charge because Holmes’ lawyers weren’t able to sufficiently prove that Love was aware of the true facts before she published the Tweet. While listening to the trial, I discovered a newfound appreciation for Judaism’s laws of lashon hara, derogatory speech.

But It’s True!

It was proven that Holmes did not take a bribe, so Love’s Tweet was, in fact, false. Yet during the trial, Love’s lawyers argued that the Tweet was simply Love’s personal opinion, not a fact. Love also claimed she had meant for the tweet to be private – a direct message to only two reporters she quoted – and that she deleted the post shortly afterward writing it. Plus, they stressed to the jury, it was all hyperbole. In their closing statements, the defending lawyers left the audience with the following question: why should the legal standards of a tweet be commensurate with a written newspaper or magazine if the Internet is blatantly saturated with exaggeration and slang?

In Judaism these distinctions do not exist. In fact, the Jewish laws of lashon hara exist precisely to protect us from such a scenario. These laws, which forbid any kind of libel, prohibit us from speaking negatively about someone else, even if it’s true.Lashon hara can be based on opinion or fact, written or spoken – in any format. Lashon hara retains its status whether it was Tweeted to 90,000 followers or merely sent to two reporters. It’s lashon hara even if you whisper it to a friend. It’s Lashon hara even if it was exaggerated hyperbole or slang. It’s lashon hara even if it was deleted immediately afterwards.

While listening to the lawyers interview and cross-examine the witnesses, I was reminded of a famous Jewish parable.

A chronic gossiper goes to a rabbi and asks for advice on how to atone for his incessant gossip. After listening to him, the Rabbi orders the man to take a feather pillow and climb to the top of a mountain. “When you get to the top,” he instructs, “take a knife and tear the pillow apart.” The Jew is puzzled but dutiful, and does as his rabbi asks. When he gets to the top of the hill, he rips his pillow. Thousands of feathers fly out as the wind carries them in all directions, blowing them miles away. Soon, there are no traces of feathers anywhere.

The Jew reports back to the rabbi in the city, telling him that he did what was asked of him.

“Perfect,” says the Rabbi. “Now go and collect all the feathers.”

“What?” the man sputters. “But that’s impossible! They blew out all over the city! Probably all over the country by now! There’s no way I can possibly find all the feathers and bring them back!”

“Precisely,” says the rabbi, sadly. “This is exactly the effect when one speaks gossip about someone else.”

Lashon Hara Online

Many of us tweet. We all speak. We text. We email. If tweets can be potentially libelous, then Facebook statuses can, too. And emails. And Instagrams. The Courtney Love trial reminds us to watch the messages we send out. Do we comprehend the extensive impact every keystroke has?

And if we think it’s hard to control gossip in a face-to-face conversation, lashon hara is exponentially magnified by the wildfire nature of the Internet. From the comfort of one’s laptop, a person can silently destroy reputations. It’s so easy to just post that juicy one-liner. And that’s precisely the problem.

Back in the Myspace days, my good friend was verbally abused online by a classmate, who called her “fat,” “ugly,” and “doormat” countless times. To this day, my friend – now 22 years old – still remembers the pain.

In a 2004 survey conducted by the i-SAFE Foundation on 1,500 American students, statistics showed that over half of adolescents and teens have engaged in cyberbullying – the harming or harassment of other people in a deliberate, repeated, and hostile manner through the use of electronic communication. ("What is Cyberbullying". U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.) The same number of adolescents have been victims of this as well. Last year, 12-year-old Rebecca Sedwick from Florida killed herself because she was being constantly tormented by two girls online. The two perpetrators – aged 12 and 14 – were arrested and charged with felonies.

The Love vs. Holmes case is a reminder of the steep price of an ill-considered statement. It involved two weeks, 12 jurors, and a potential bill for $8 million – all for a two-second act of carelessness.

Our words have enormous power to do harm and do good. Imagine how we can transform the conversation across all social media platforms by carefully observing the law of lashon hara.

Related Articles:

About the Author

Yael Farzan is a senior at Yeshiva University’s Stern College for Women, double-majoring in English and Psychology. Originally from Los Angeles, she is a freelance writer and editor for several publications.

i agree with the premise that you should not say bad things about others, however what do we do with the duty to protect our brothers and sisters about people or things that we believe may hurt them by informing them of our beliefs?The only caviat should be that we should have really have inquired about the facts that we feels we should reveil and only if we are really convinced of their veracity and being able to show that in fact we had very good reasons to believe them to be true that we may and possibly even must publish them.

And i think this is the common legal acceptable definition of freedom of expression and its application.

Just a question, anybody has a opinion?let me (us) know.

(7)
Hadasa,
March 23, 2014 8:20 PM

A powerful lesson… thank you, Yael, for finding the direct correlation between Love's lawsuit and the beauty of guarding our speech.

(6)
Beverly Kurtin,
March 23, 2014 8:13 PM

Feathers, feathers everywhere

Lashon hara is a bit like poison...no, it is EXACTLY like poison.

Having been the target of poisoned speech, I know what it is to be shunned by those who believe the lies only to discover that they WERE lies.

I was once branded a thief. I refused to defend myself as I knew the truth and knew that I would be found to be innocent.

I've been asked a few times why I did not utter a word. It was because I knew who the thief was and decided to let him reveal himself, which he soon did. When he admitted to the previous theft, I, of course, was exonerated.

So why didn't I defend myself over the accusations? Because that is what all thieves do! Knowing the individual who did the theft and knowing that if I pointed a finger at him, "I" would just dig a larger hole for myself--that is what thieves do and I am NOT a thief. I take "you shall not steal" to heat.

What amused me is that the people who believed me capable of stealing what was not mine said afterwards that the KNEW I hadn't done the deed. Yes, they had. People are almost always willing to believe the worst about someone while very infrequently are willing to believe the best.

It's a strange world HaShem gave us.

(5)
Samantha,
March 23, 2014 7:51 PM

A great article - I never saw the effects of Loshon Hara put in this way and its so true! Thank you!

(4)
SH,
March 23, 2014 6:14 PM

Great article

Great article, Yael!

(3)
English Speaker,
March 23, 2014 4:59 PM

true fact

what other sort are there? If not true, they are not facts.

(2)
Anonymous,
March 23, 2014 12:55 PM

Wonderful parable about the pillow!

(1)
jacob,
March 23, 2014 12:21 PM

good piece

Lashon Hara is not just detrimental to others. It is also detrimental to the person speaking such language. It slowly destroys the perpetrator's soul.

I just got married and have an important question: Can we eat rice on Passover? My wife grew up eating it, and I did not. Is this just a matter of family tradition?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

The Torah instructs a Jew not to eat (or even possess) chametz all seven days of Passover (Exodus 13:3). "Chametz" is defined as any of the five grains (wheat, spelt, barley, oats, and rye) that came into contact with water for more than 18 minutes. Chametz is a serious Torah prohibition, and for that reason we take extra protective measures on Passover to prevent any mistakes.

Hence the category of food called "kitniyot" (sometimes referred to generically as "legumes"). This includes rice, corn, soy beans, string beans, peas, lentils, peanuts, mustard, sesame seeds and poppy seeds. Even though kitniyot cannot technically become chametz, Ashkenazi Jews do not eat them on Passover. Why?

Products of kitniyot often appear like chametz products. For example, it can be hard to distinguish between rice flour (kitniyot) and wheat flour (chametz). Also, chametz grains may become inadvertently mixed together with kitniyot. Therefore, to prevent confusion, all kitniyot were prohibited.

In Jewish law, there is one important distinction between chametz and kitniyot. During Passover, it is forbidden to even have chametz in one's possession (hence the custom of "selling chametz"). Whereas it is permitted to own kitniyot during Passover and even to use it - not for eating - but for things like baby powder which contains cornstarch. Similarly, someone who is sick is allowed to take medicine containing kitniyot.

What about derivatives of kitniyot - e.g. corn oil, peanut oil, etc? This is a difference of opinion. Many will use kitniyot-based oils on Passover, while others are strict and only use olive or walnut oil.

Finally, there is one product called "quinoa" (pronounced "ken-wah" or "kin-o-ah") that is permitted on Passover even for Ashkenazim. Although it resembles a grain, it is technically a grass, and was never included in the prohibition against kitniyot. It is prepared like rice and has a very high protein content. (It's excellent in "cholent" stew!) In the United States and elsewhere, mainstream kosher supervision agencies certify it "Kosher for Passover" -- look for the label.

Interestingly, the Sefardi Jewish community does not have a prohibition against kitniyot. This creates the strange situation, for example, where one family could be eating rice on Passover - when their neighbors will not. So am I going to guess here that you are Ashkenazi and your wife is Sefardi. Am I right?

Yahrtzeit of Rabbi Moses ben Nachman (1194-1270), known as Nachmanides, and by the acronym of his name, Ramban. Born in Spain, he was a physician by trade, but was best-known for authoring brilliant commentaries on the Bible, Talmud, and philosophy. In 1263, King James of Spain authorized a disputation (religious debate) between Nachmanides and a Jewish convert to Christianity, Pablo Christiani. Nachmanides reluctantly agreed to take part, only after being assured by the king that he would have full freedom of expression. Nachmanides won the debate, which earned the king's respect and a prize of 300 gold coins. But this incensed the Church: Nachmanides was charged with blasphemy and he was forced to flee Spain. So at age 72, Nachmanides moved to Jerusalem. He was struck by the desolation in the Holy City -- there were so few Jews that he could not even find a minyan to pray. Nachmanides immediately set about rebuilding the Jewish community. The Ramban Synagogue stands today in Jerusalem's Old City, a living testimony to his efforts.

It's easy to be intimidated by mean people. See through their mask. Underneath is an insecure and unhappy person. They are alienated from others because they are alienated from themselves.

Have compassion for them. Not pity, not condemning, not fear, but compassion. Feel for their suffering. Identify with their core humanity. You might be able to influence them for the good. You might not. Either way your compassion frees you from their destructiveness. And if you would like to help them change, compassion gives you a chance to succeed.

It is the nature of a person to be influenced by his fellows and comrades (Rambam, Hil. De'os 6:1).

We can never escape the influence of our environment. Our life-style impacts upon us and, as if by osmosis, penetrates our skin and becomes part of us.

Our environment today is thoroughly computerized. Computer intelligence is no longer a science-fiction fantasy, but an everyday occurrence. Some computers can even carry out complete interviews. The computer asks questions, receives answers, interprets these answers, and uses its newly acquired information to ask new questions.

Still, while computers may be able to think, they cannot feel. The uniqueness of human beings is therefore no longer in their intellect, but in their emotions.

We must be extremely careful not to allow ourselves to become human computers that are devoid of feelings. Our culture is in danger of losing this essential aspect of humanity, remaining only with intellect. Because we communicate so much with unfeeling computers, we are in danger of becoming disconnected from our own feelings and oblivious to the feelings of others.

As we check in at our jobs, and the computer on our desk greets us with, "Good morning, Mr. Smith. Today is Wednesday, and here is the agenda for today," let us remember that this machine may indeed be brilliant, but it cannot laugh or cry. It cannot be happy if we succeed, or sad if we fail.

Today I shall...

try to remain a human being in every way - by keeping in touch with my own feelings and being sensitive to the feelings of others.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...